From the library
A.G. Lafley, Roger L. Martin, 2013
In one paragraph
Lafley and Martin reduce strategy to five linked choices: winning aspiration, where to play, how to win, capabilities, management systems. The contribution is insisting the answers must be specific enough to exclude something, and that a strategy compatible with any outcome is not one. Most useful for a team whose plan is a list of goals. Least useful for a small or early business, since the examples are all consumer goods at scale.
Where this sits in the operating system
Focus & Essentialism
Focus & Essentialism
Systems Over Goals
Mental Models & Decision Frameworks
Key insights
Five cascading choices: winning aspiration, where to play, how to win, capabilities, management systems. They must be consistent with each other.
Where to play and how to win are one decision made twice. Answering either alone produces a slogan.
If the strategy does not exclude something, it is not a strategy. Test each choice by naming what it rules out.
The same idea, argued differently
Geoffrey Moore
Frank Slootman
Brian Christian, Tom Griffiths
The full breakdown
Before you close this
Naming the specific moment you will act roughly doubles the odds you do.
Reference
We use cookies to enhance your experience, analyze site traffic, and personalize content. You can manage your preferences or learn more in our Privacy Policy.